undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmonocasa7y ago0 comments

I don't think they would assuming that they wrote their own game and were only using of Sony's what was necessary to run their own code.

See Chamberlain v. Skylink for a post DMCA case on the matter.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._S....

0 comments

tzs7y ago

HN's algorithm to turn a URL into a clickable link can have trouble with links that end in punctuation, and your link fell victim. Here's an attempt to make it work:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._S...?

That's a mobile link since yours was mobile. Here's the non-mobile version:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Sky...?

Pharaoh27y ago

That seems to deal with anti-circumvention provisions and not copyright provision and not with infringing on trademark/copyright as the GGGGP (white-flame) seems to be pointing to.

monocasaOP7y ago

Chamberlain is cited as a rebuttal to the DMCA argument; the DMCA has nothing to do with trademarks, and therefore I took it's citation to be in reference to it's anti-circumvention clauses. For the trademark argument, see Sega v. Accolade's decision.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse